The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.

Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?

Might be a tight fit - the Italian FREMM hangars are not symmetrical, the starboard hangar is sized for an AW101 while the port hangar is only sized for a NH90. Height-wise a Seahawk would fit in the NH90 hangar, not sure whether it's deep enough though.

Within the Italian Navy, the two carrier groups by homeporting are currently each laid out to ultimately include two AAW ships, two ASW frigates and two GP frigates each, with 10 of those 12 ships formed by variations of the FREMM (the other two are the larger Horizon class AAW destroyers). The French, a bit more AAW-centric, use two ASW and four AAW ships - two Horizons and four FREMMs - with the combined expeditionary groups at Toulon centered on Charles de Gaulle and the three Mistrals, while the other four ASW FREMM form the screening group for the French SSBN force.

Kato already pointed out one of the most capable ASW "Frigates" available, so I'll take a different approach.

Rather than rapidly blowing through the budget building a handful of destroyer sized ASW "frigates", I propose an approach that provides a lot more hulls. For better or worse, the USN has already bought a number of LCSs. With the ASW mission package they bring the following to the table:

One of the biggest things going for the LCS in my opinion is that it sports huge aviation facilities. The 1,030 m2 (11,100 sq ft) flight deck on the Independence class can support two MH-60s (more than the FREMM-IT or even a Burke) on a ship that displaces less than 3000 tons.

What I propose is that 2-4 ASW focused LCSs be assigned to each CSG, and given control of a few ACTUV drones each. With it's focus on modular capabilities I think the LCS is well suited to being setup for controlling independant drones. If each LCS is assigned 3 ACTUV drones, you'll effectively have 16 hulls and 8 helicopters all sweeping for subs/mines just from the frigates.

While individually less capable than a FREMM-IT, this setup would allow HUGE volumes to be swept extremely quickly. Large numbers of available hulls also allow for some flexibility that isn't otherwise available. Part of the ASW escort could easily be detached or sent ahead as a screen without leaving the CSG naked or requiring Burkes to shift focus to ASW work.

Yeah, but they still do not have a ASW module for the LCS. The Navy still has not awarded the contract to build the Escort Mission Module (ASW module). Select something that is proven and not a money-pit!

What I propose is that 2-4 ASW focused LCSs be assigned to each CSG...

Those are optimized for use in shallow water. The CSG needs ASW FFGs that can remain with the group in foul weather. Hostile opponent's submarines can operate submerged in deep water in the worst of weather. If the FFGs have to flee from weather, the resulting vulnerability could be exploited.

Those are optimized for use in shallow water. The CSG needs ASW FFGs that can remain with the group in foul weather. Hostile opponent's submarines can operate submerged in deep water in the worst of weather. If the FFGs have to flee from weather, the resulting vulnerability could be exploited.

According to Austal, it can handle up to Sea State 8 and launch and recover aircraft up to Sea State 5 which is on par with a Burke's ability to launch helos. It wouldn't be the first time that smaller ships have worked with the big boys, we haven't built Destroyer Escorts in a while, but they were comparable in size to the LCS or even smaller. That said it would certainly be a wild ride!

Yeah, but they still do not have a ASW module for the LCS. The Navy still has not awarded the contract to build the Escort Mission Module (ASW module). Select something that is proven and not a money-pit!

Sounds like the decision is imminent, and this is the USN we're talking about. Everything's a money pit! (except maybe the Virginia's)

My thinking is that the USN is going to be ordering this stuff regardless so it's somewhat of a sunk cost already, and buying more of something that's already being procured is going to help reduce the price as opposed to buying or building a totally new type of ship. One other aspect to the LCS that's both good and bad is that it takes relatively few men to crew it. That's great for ongoing the operating costs which are arguably more important than initial procurement, but could be iffy with regards to damage control.

Within the Italian Navy, the two carrier groups by homeporting are currently each laid out to ultimately include two AAW ships, two ASW frigates and two GP frigates each, with 10 of those 12 ships formed by variations of the FREMM (the other two are the larger Horizon class AAW destroyers). The French, a bit more AAW-centric, use two ASW and four AAW ships - two Horizons and four FREMMs - with the combined expeditionary groups at Toulon centered on Charles de Gaulle and the three Mistrals, while the other four ASW FREMM form the screening group for the French SSBN force.

I couldn't get a good handle on the differences in the sub-classes on Wikipedia. Is it simply training and mission tasking, magazine load-out, or actual differences in the sensor and weapon suites?

The different Sylver VLS versions are basically what "self-defense", "tactical" and "strike" length are to Mk41. The A43 can only fit Aster 15; A50 can also fit Aster 30; and A70 can also fit Scalp Naval (MdCN) cruise missiles. There is also a A35 version which fits Mica VL missiles; the FR versions by design nominally allow for additional installation of 4x8 A35 on the port side of the hangar (the IT versions have an enlarged hangar and a 76mm gun in that place). The Italian versions - other than AAW - don't carry A70 partially because Italy hasn't bought MdCN (yet - their air force uses the air-launched version). The two French AAW will also be usable for ASW; the Italian GP and AAW versions make poor ASW boats without a towed sonar.

Other than that there are minor differences (e.g. Exocet for France vs Otomat for Italy, also gun fit between countries).

For the French, the only thing the AAW version loses over the ASW version is the capability to fire cruise missiles, instead allowing a larger load of long-range surface-to-air missiles. If the squadron needs more than the 224 VLS cells + 4 towed sonars that group provides they could always retask some ASW FREMMs from the FOST SSBN group or attach some of the five FTI frigates (with ASW focus) also stationed at Toulon.

For the Italians... well, their procurement is a mess anyway and in my opinion in recent years seems to be focused on putting shipyards to work with a large amount of large hulls; they've already started on the next class (PPA, 6300t FL displacement) with no less than 16 hulls, which will come in a frigate version (at least five ships) with similar specs to the FREMM ASW-GP - and a OPV/HADR version (up to eleven ships) without missiles fitted for possible later upgrade.

For the Italians... well, their procurement is a mess anyway and in my opinion in recent years seems to be focused on putting shipyards to work with a large amount of large hulls; they've already started on the next class (PPA, 6300t FL displacement) with no less than 16 hulls, which will come in a frigate version (at least five ships) with similar specs to the FREMM ASW-GP - and a OPV/HADR version (up to eleven ships) without missiles fitted for possible later upgrade.

I thought Italy was having cash flow problems. Where are they getting the capital for a new carrier, MEADS, NH90S, a pile of destroyer sized frigates, and 90 F-35s in such a short time frame?

Where are they getting the capital for a new carrier, MEADS, NH90S, a pile of destroyer sized frigates, and 90 F-35s in such a short time frame?

They cross-fund procurement from the budget of the Ministry of Industry lately, basically for economic stimulus - and we're not talking about just small amounts, since 2014 they more than doubled the procurement component through that cross-funding - Italy now spends around 4.8 billion Euro per year on procurement, with the entire rest of the defence budget at a stable low 11 billion (meaning for defence expenditures procurement runs 30% of their budget - 20% are the NATO target number).

Aside from the items mentioned they're also buying new surveillance satellites and - not yet funded - are looking to buy a brigade worth of Freccia IFVs (out of a planned final procurement for a full division).